FACTS which contradict what is taught in the universities and which even run counter to the assumptions made by critics of misandry.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

“League of Woman Victims of Men,” France - 1922

FULL
TEXT (Article 1 of 5): Nice. April 8. – Convinced that woman’s place is
fighting man. Some bellicose women have founded an anti-man society, the League
of Woman Victims of Men [translation, perhaps, of “Societé des Victimes
Féminines des Hommes”], which is gaining recruits along the Riviera to carry on
the struggle.

The
leaders are convinced that half the members of their sex have grievances
against some man. The first meeting of the league was held here recently to
discuss the scope of the organization’s activities.

First
qualifications for membership is that the candidate prove she has suffered from
“some perfidious male.” It is understood members so far are mostly jilted
fiancees, secretaries and typists who have lost their jobs because of their
employers’ favoritism, and women whose business affairs have been mismanaged by
a man.

[“Women’s
League Against Tyrant Man Is Formed - French Victims of Male Perfidy Band
Together to Battle Their Oppressors.” Syndicated, The Burlington Hawk-Eye
(Io.), Apr. 9, 1922, p. 1]

***

Note: The following description of the Nice, France organization,
"League of Women Victims of Men,” gives a much more militant image than
other reports. It is clear that it is London-based Marie Petti, an “ultra-feminist,”
whose influence stands behind the ambitious and decidedly misandric agenda out
lined here.

FULL TEXT (Article 2 of 5): A feminine anti-man society has
been formed at Nice (France). Its motto is "Down With Man." This
association has as its object the exclusion of men from all positions which can
be filled by women. The anti-man movement among women, of which branches exist in London, has broken out on the Riviera. The initial meeting is reported of the
"League of Women Victims of Men.”

The proceedings of the new body were
held in secret, but it is stated that the conditions of membership are that
candidates must satisfy the committee that they have definitely suffered in
their own interests through the direct fault of men. Jilted fiancees, women who
have been displaced from business posts on the real or fancied ground of sex
jealousy, spinsters who have lost their incomes owing to the maladministration
or fraud of men trustees, or solicitors, are all among the foundation members.

The purpose of the league is to encourage the final transfer of effective
authority in the world to women, to combat male influence wherever it can be
opposed, and to attempt to break down the convention which causes girl-children
to be taught to aspire to the degrading servitude of marriage with a male whom
they are encouraged to reverence as a superior entity.

FULL TEXT (Article 3 of 5): Paris. July 20. – the League of
Women Victims of Men, organized at Nice in January, has been dissolved.

Requisites for membership included a violent hatred of men,
gained through sufficient reasons. The founder of the club was Countess
de Wrangel, who declared she had been jilted by five different men. Another
member, Madalaine Ellancourt, was an artist who said dealers refused to buy her
paintings because she was ugly.

Secret meetings were held at which vows of the most binding
character were uttered. A solemn rule was that no member should ever be polite
to a man, let alone be subservient to him.

Two marriages were recently celebrated in the South of
France. One, at Nice, was that of Baroness de Wrangel to Count Felipe de
Miraille. The other took place at Toulon, and the bridegroom of Madelaine
Ellancourt was a French naval officer.

(Note: the word “subversive” in the original, presumed to be
an error, has been changed to “subservient).

***

FULL TEXT (Article 4 of 5): They were twenty saucy rebels
with a grudge against all males, and they started “The League of Women Victims
Of Men,” dedicated to the proposition that sex shouldn’t count in art or
business; that women are “individuals” rather than “dowds” or “stunners;” that
they should be treated as such, not approved for a pretty ankle or ignored
because of a pimply nose! There was Mlle. Zerlina Balten, who said the public
wouldn’t take her music seriously because she was so good-looking. And there
was Mlle. Madeleine Ellancourt, who said the dealers wouldn’t buy buy paintings
because she was so ugly. And there was Countess Hedwig de Wrangel, who said all
her suitors adored her face and closed their ears to her brainy conversation.

There were seventeen others, all with the same fury, and
they got together a few weeks ago, in the tearoom at the Casino at Nice, and
they formed their “Victims’ League,” and they utterly condemned women who
“vamp” their way in the world, and, my! how they did lambaste the men for
allowing the “vamps” to influence them! “It’s shame – that’s – what it is!”
declared black-eyed Mlle. Balten. “I am a violinist and I want to succeed on my
merits as a violinist. But what happen? My applause, when I wear knee-length
skirts, is twice as generous as when I wear ankle-length skirts. I don’t want a
Beethoven concerto cheered because I have nice limbs. But my managers insist on
daring gowns.”

“It’s the same story here, only I’m ugly,” frankly admitted
Mlle Ellancourt. “I might be another Velasquez, and still the dealers would
look at my face and shrug, while some little snip with baby-doll eyes and a
‘coo’ in her voice would get an atrocity into the Salon. I call it wrong!”

“Sex has a place in the world, but it shouldn’t enter into a
career,” chimed in Carmen Cartelrferi, the actress. “We are all willing to love
and be loved, to become wives and mothers. But I don’t want to make a living on
the strength of the fact that men like my shoulders. I want to be an actress
first and a beauty second.”

‘It goes farther than that,” said Countess de Wrangel. “Five
men proposed to me because they fell in love with my eyes or my hair or my
complexion. They didn’t know the first thing about my mind. I shall never
marry, because I refuse to be wanted for my physical self alone. And that’s
about the only reason men many women these days!”

“We should all make that resolve,” seconded Mlle.
Ellancourt. “What’s more, we ought to make a vow right now never, never to use
the appeal of our sex to advance our artistic or business ambitions. It is just
as unfair to Mlle. Balten, who is beautiful, as it is to me, who am ugly. We
are victims of men, but it’s time the victims turned!”

Amid fervid enthusiasm Mlle. Ellancourt’s suggestion was
adopted. “The League of Women Victims of Men” was formally organized, with a
president and vice-president, constitution, by-laws and everything. Its members
pledged themselves, in tea, “never, never to use the appeal of sex to advance
their business or artistic ambitions.”

Mere dislike of men, it was decreed, was not a qualification
for membership. The league had no quarrel with men as fiends or sweethearts;
it planned no campaign against romance. But it set out to eliminate the sex
equation in the business affairs of life – no more actresses started because
they “vamped” the producers; no more pretty stenographers promoted above merely
efficient stenographers; no more employment of feminine wiles to influence
masculine susceptibility.

And then, just the other day, the news was rushed to Paris
of the marriage in the south of France of Count Felipe the Miraille to – no
less a lady than Countess de Wrangel. And simultaneously from Toulon came
announcement of the wedding of a French naval officer and – Mlle. Madeleine
Ellancourt.

“Why, we thought they were never, never going to be
married!” gasped startled Parisians. “What became of the League of Women
Victims of Men?”

Inquiry revealed that the league was dissolved, smashed,
blown up, disbanded, flopped.

Why?

Let the answer be whispered softly. The ladies just couldn’t
keep from “vamping!” The League of Victims became a victim of the very thing it
set out to crush. Here is the story, as it is gossiped along the boulevards:

The members tripped out of the Nice Casino, chattering
enthusiastically about the new club. They were resolved to make it a glorious
success. Unfortunately, each member conceived it her duty to watch the other
members. There was a pronounced tendency to keep their eyes on one another
rather than on themselves.

Before long there was gossip. And in the train of gossip
came dissension.

“My dear, did you see that woman at the dance last night?
She was with that Italian millionaire who owns so many theatres. I was in the
group when she was introduced, and– do
you know? – she fairly seized him! The way she was hanging on his arm last
night – of course, I don’t accuse her of absolutely trying to ‘work’ him. She
may be sincerely attracted to the man, though, how on earth – well, it seems to
me if the league is going to do anything at all serious she should be made an
example of.”

The subject of this tid-bit was one of the leaders of the
new movement. And when she let it be known that the Italian producer had
promised to star her, her fellow members held an indignation meeting.

The meeting, called to consider one complaint, quickly
developed into a free-for-all.

Somebody was acid enough to inquire when Zerlina Balten was
going to deliver an ultimatum to her manager in regard to those “daring gowns”
she was “forced” to wear. There had been a concert at the Casino, it appeared,
and Mlle. Zerlina was one of the artists.

It was noticed, remarked the speaker, that the applause was
indeed “generous,” but she, for one, would like to know what was being
applauded – the Beethoven concerto or, so to speak, the ankles?

Loungers in the Casino veranda whisper that at this stage of
the proceedings Mlle. Zerlina made her exit. Her eyes were snapping and she is
said to have slammed the door with a bang. At her next public appearance she
defiantly wore her skirt even shorter.

The “indignation meeting” was just that, say ex-members of
the league, with most of the indignation directed at those who were right
there. Mlle. Zerlina was not the only one who rushed out of the room in a rage.
When adjournment was finally taken the twenty charter members had been reduced
to less than a dozen, and even among these the seeds of suspicion had begun
exuberant growth.”

The marriages of Mlle. Ellancourt and the Countess de
Wrangel knocked the last props out from the organization. Since they renounced
their pledges in favor of matrimony five other engagements of former league
members have been made known.

Countess de Wrangel, the new Countess de Miraille, is well
known in the United States. Her marriage to Ernest Carlrustor de Wrangel in
1901 was internationally celebrated, as he was a famous sportsman and soldier
and had served with the British in the Boer War and with American volunteers in
the Spanish-American war.

The Countess herself was on the stage in New York some years
ago. She played at the Irving Place Theatre, where her blond beauty won her the
name of the “Teuton Juno.” When she returned to her estate in the Black Forest,
shortly before the world war, she disappeared from the public eye until she
again sprang into prominence as the leader of the “Victims of Men” club.

Now that the Countess has another husband people are mean
enough to wonder whether he married her for her “beauty or her brains.” Now
that Mllle. Ellancourt has become the wife of the naval officer, they are
waiting to see whether she will be just as ambitious to get her paintings into
the Salon or whether she will still consider herself a “victim.”

As for the other “victims,” the observant say that Mlle.
Zerlina Balten is affecting more daring costumes than ever; that Carmen
Cartellierl’s shoulders are far from concealed in her latest production; that
not a single one of the “victims,” in fact, has discarded roguish smiles or dazzling
glances in the masculine presence, be it a business appointment or what not.

[“Why ‘Victims of Men’ Blew Up - Spectacular Rise and Fall
of the League to Abolish Vamping in Art and Business, and Its Sudden Explosion
When the Disillusioned Lady Members Refused to Obey Their Own Runes,”
syndicated (International Serials, Inc.), Jul. 2, 1922, p. ? (Chronicling
America image “44”); widely published in numerous newspapers]

***

FULL TEXT (Article 5 of 5): Somebody, somewhere, has been oppressing women
again!

They admit it themselves.

And so the poor, dear oppressed ones have started a new
society over in Europe called “The League of Woman Victims of Man.”

One imagines the meeting of two fair creatures anywhere
along the Riviera – (the present happy hunting ground of the league.)

Says Madame to Mam’selle, “Are you a Victim?”

And Mam’selle answers, smilingly, “Not today, but I hope to
be one tomorrow!”

All a lady has to do to join is to prove that she has been
jilted, or swindled, or fired by some mere man.

Then she and the other league members doubtless spend the
rest of their lives swapping sufferings and explaining to each other that no
man is fit to be trusted.

Probably it is a great idea for Europe, but I can think of
one even greater for America. Ladies and gentlemen – especially gentlemen in
the sacred name of the chivalry due to the Weaker Sex (male).

I rise to propose the formation of a League of Man Victims
of Woman.

And I venture to prophesy that the American membership will
be practically unanimous who’s who in male victims?

Well – there’s the man in the subway whose eyes are put out
by the trajectory of this season’s feather trimmings.

There’s the suburban commuter whose hat is jammed over his
nose by the newspaper the woman behind him wields.

There’s the man who carries that baby,

The man who carries the Sunday roast,

The man who carries his wife’s packages.

The man who always – everywhere – in this bright land of
free and independent women, carries the bag!

There’s the gentleman who Is shot up by his wife, or
near-wife,

There’s the prosecuting attorney who tiles to convict her,

There’s her own attorney whom she kisses,

There are the male witnesses and jurymen, who have to waste
perfectly good time in court over a foregone conclusion.

There’s the man who can’t swear at his pretty but
incompetent stenographer because she would say he’s no gentleman;

Who can’t scold her – because she cries.

Who can’t fire her – because ladles must live,

Who can’t marry her – because he’s married already,

There’s the man who pays the subway nickels, the luncheon
checks, the taxi fares, the theatre tickets, the florist bills, the movie
admissions, the millinery assessments, the tips, the taxes.

The man who pays – and pays – and pays for the privilege –
dear indeed – of woman’s society.

There’s the rich man who believes that he loved for himself
alone – until she asks for alimony.

There’s the man of sixty who can’t understand why his
twenty-one year old wife leaves him.

There’s the man whose wife tells the other man that he
doesn’t understand.

There’s the other man himself – his troubles are just
beginning.

There’s the man who must bring home his unopened pay envelope.

There’s the man who stays at home with the children while
his wife goes to the movies.

There’s the man who goes without it spring overcoat so that
his wife may have a spring cape.

There’s the man who can’t smoke in the living room because
it would ruin the curtains.

There’s the man who alwayseats the tail of the steak, the over-crisp bacon, the under-done potato.

There’s the man who must entertain all the boring friends
and relatives of his wife. While his own remain strictly “on the outside.”

There’s the man who gives his wife the money to buy him a
birthday gift – and is presented with a new rug for the dining room.

But for president of the league of man victims of woman I
nominate the man who makes a speech that his wife ought not to take his name!

Oh, I know that in the past the cards have been

And it may be so again:

But in the manner of present-day victimizing I think at
least there’s an even break.

If European women are victims, so are American men!

They need protection worse than bootleggers, or native
American wild birds, or any luckless citizen of New York city.

1 comment:

Third-wave feminism is often associated with the emergence of, so-called, "lipstick" or "girly" feminisms and the rise of "raunch culture". This is because these new feminisms advocated for “expressions of femininity and female sexuality as a challenge to objectification.” Accordingly, this included the dismissal of any restriction, whether deemed patriarchal or feminist, to define or control how women or girls can dress, act, or generally express themselves. [Wikipedia]